Home » Law Enforcement Articles » Court Ruling Could Invalidate Local Sex Offender Residency Restrictions
Court Ruling Could Invalidate Local Sex Offender Residency Restrictions
Learn more about a recent court case that nullifies city and county sex offender restrictions that substantially interfere with state-level policies.
September 14, 2011 /Law Enforcement PR News/ -- In October 2008, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Pennsylvania Institutional Law Project filed a lawsuit on behalf of six sex offenders residing in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, challenging the county's residency restrictions for people convicted of sex crimes. In the summer of 2011, a decision was issued in the lawsuit that could have a far-reaching impact on city and county sex offender residency restrictions throughout the state.
County Residency Restrictions Found Invalid
In 2008, Allegheny County enacted a provision making it unlawful for registered sex offenders to live within 2,500 feet of a school, park, child-care facility, community center or recreational facility. If a sex offender had been living in a prohibited area before the restriction was enacted, he or she had to move to a permissible area within 45 days. Because schools, parks, child-care facilities, community centers and recreational facilities are so common in Allegheny County, however, this law effectively prevented anyone convicted of a sex crime from legally residing anywhere in the county except for a few wilderness areas and high-income neighborhoods.
The lawsuit challenged the Allegheny County law on the grounds that it impermissibly interfered with Pennsylvania's Megan's Law, the state-level law governing sex offender residency. After a federal district court ruled to strike down the law, the case eventually made it to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania for a decision.
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania declared Allegheny County's residency restrictions invalid. The court stated that the Pennsylvania General Assembly had enacted "policies of rehabilitation, reintegration and diversion from prison of appropriate offenders," and the county legislation "significantly interfere[d] with the operation of the Sentencing and Parole Codes." Therefore, because the county law impermissibly interfered with an existing state law on the same subject, the county law was struck down.
Broader Implications for Sex Offender Residency Restrictions
Because the case was decided by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the ruling could apply to county- and city-level sex offender residency restrictions across the state. This ruling may signal that over-burdensome residency restrictions may be successfully challenged if they unreasonably interfere with the state's laws.
This case is just one example of how the advocacy of an attorney can make a difference in the quality of life for people convicted of sex crimes and help them live in areas where transportation, employment, counseling and community and family support systems are available. If you have questions about sex offender registration or residency restrictions, or if you have been charged with a sex crime, promptly contact an experienced Pennsylvania criminal defense attorney.
Article provided by Patrick J. Artur & Associates
Visit us at www.willdefend.com
---
Press release service and press release distribution provided by http://www.24-7pressrelease.com |
|
|
Press Release Contact Information:
Findlaw PR
|
|
|
|
|
| LAW ENFORCEMENT ARCHIVE SEARCH |
|
|
| |
| SUBMIT LAW ENFORCEMENT NEWS |
|
|
| |
|
|
Advertise With Us |
About Us |
Contact Us